Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives The rapid adoption of AI tools like ChatGPT has transformed information access, particularly in healthcare. However, engagement with AI may be influenced by factors such as healthcare accessibility and educational resources, with potential implications for misinformation in low-resource settings. This study investigates the relationship between physician density, tertiary education enrollment, and national interest in ChatGPT. Methods A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using global datasets. Physician density, tertiary education enrollment, GDP, and internet penetration were sourced from WHO, UNESCO, and the World Bank, respectively. The primary outcome, ChatGPT interest scores, was derived from Google Trends. Pearson correlation and multiple linear regression analyses were used to explore associations, controlling for GDP and internet penetration. Logistic regression was employed as a sensitivity analysis, categorizing variables into high and low groups. Results Data from 100 countries were analyzed. A significant negative correlation was observed between physician density and ChatGPT interest (r = -0.32, p = 0.012). Multiple linear regression confirmed that lower physician density was significantly associated with higher ChatGPT interest (β = -0.2857, p = 0.045). Tertiary education enrollment showed no significant association with ChatGPT interest. Logistic regression supported these findings, with higher physician density significantly reducing the likelihood of high ChatGPT interest (OR = 0.214, p = 0.001). Conclusion Our study suggests that regions with fewer healthcare professionals may engage more with AI tools like ChatGPT, highlighting the need for careful integration of AI into healthcare systems to prevent misinformation and support equitable access to reliable health information. Public Interest Summary It is well known that people who have difficulty in accessing healthcare may turn to the internet for medical advice, but it is not yet known if artificial intelligence, like ChatGPT, is being adopted by users for this same purpose. Given the widespread use of ChatGPT, this study explored whether ChatGPT interest in different countries was related to the number of physicians in those countries. We found that in countries with fewer doctors per capita, public interest in ChatGPT tends to be higher. While this does not confirm that people are using ChatGPT specifically for medical advice, it raises important questions about how AI may be filling gaps in access to healthcare. Given the potential for AI to spread inaccurate information, these findings highlight the need for careful regulation to ensure AI tools are used responsibly and do not contribute to misinformation in healthcare.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».